' QALANDAR ALI KHAN, J.---Mutihaida Transport Association (Registered) Hazara Division at Abbottabad, through its President, Ijaz Qureshi have invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of this Court through writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 with the following prayer; "On acceptance of the instant writ petition, the new rates of fares determined for the rolles attached thereto be set-aside and the rates be fixed reasonably and matching to the schedule announced in 2002 by respondent No,1 himself and as published in the press in December, 2008 being cohesive and coordinating to the rates of fuel and the minimum kilometers charges for a passenger shall be fixed as Rs,2.25 Per kilometer. Any other relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. Aggrieved of the notification by the Secretary, Provincial Transport Authority, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar, (respondent No,1) declaring new rates of fares applicable to the transport being run on diesel oil, on the ground of the same being totally unreasonable, and having been published without consultation, unilaterally and arbitrarily, the petitioners are seeking fixation of rates matching to the schedule announced in 2002 and published in press in December, 2008, claiming the same to be cohesive and coordinating to the rates of fuel. The petitioners have assailed the proposed rates on the grounds of hike of maintenance cost, salaries and other numerous overhead expenses, making it practically impossible to run the transport system based on diesel with burden of newly imposed rates of fares. The petitioners contended that if the architects of administration were extremely desirous of extending benefit of the recent slump in oil prices, they should have reviewed the entire rate lists of commodities and bring down their prices as well, as price hike at its place would not permit the transport industry to exist as the marginal profit line, according to the petitioners, has been totally erased.
3. Since the main grievance of the petitioners relates to declaration of the new rates of fares, according to them, without consultation, unilaterally and arbitrarily, the Secretary, Provincial Transport Authority, KPK, Peshawar (respondent No,1) and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Abbottabad, (respondent No,4) were directed to appear in person along with the entire record in order to resolve the controversy. The respondents appeared in the Court and showed their willingness to mull over the issue with representatives of the Transport Association in a joint meeting.
4. A meeting of the Provincial Transport Authority with Transporters of Hazara and Peshawar was accordingly held on 04.02.2015. In the meeting, the main issue was identified as overcharging of high adda fee by the contractors of General Bus Stands; and, consequently, the following recommendations;
(i) The LG & RD Department may be requested to implement the scheduled rates notification in GBSs.
(ii) The Notification of 2002 may be implemented."
5. It may be added here that after impugned notification dated 09.12.2014 and pursuant to further reduction in oil prices by the Federal ,Government, rates of fares have been further reduced in January, 2015 and February, 2015, therefore, instead of focusing on the impugned notification dated 09.12.2014, it would be appropriate to concentrate on the actual issue, forcing the petitioners to approach this Court.
6. The main grievance of the petitioners is that rates of fares have been reduced by the concerned authority only on the basis of reduction in oil prices without taking into consideration 'hike of maintenance cost, 'salaries', and 'other numerous overhead expenses' ; but the record made available would show that the yard-stick for fixation of rates of fares has all along been fluctuation in oil prices.
7. The petitioners are seeking fixation of rates of fares on the basis of notification dated 04.02.2002 but they lost sight of the fact that the formula for fixation of rates of fares envisaged in the said notification was also slab based having nexus to fluctuation in the prices of fuel. As such, never before, the prices of 'maintenance cost', 'salaries' and 'other numerous overhead expenses' ever formed basis for fixation of rates of fares.
8. The documents made available by the parties would clearly show notification dated 19.09.2012 forming basis for the impugned notification dated 09.12.2014 and subsequent notifications further reducing rates of fares consequent upon reduction in prices of oil; but the petitioners have never challenged that basis notified earlier in the year 2012.
9. Needless to say that hike in prices of essential commodities, 'maintenance cost', 'salaries' and 'other numerous overhead expenses' is a part of phenomenon not confined to this region alone. It is, therefore, something beyond comprehension that only transporters of Hazara region would raise hue and cry over reduction in rates of fares when transporters not only in rest of regions in the province but all over country are satisfied and have accepted new rates. It may also be added here that rates of fares in the province of Punjab are even lesser than this province, as would be seen from the notification of the Government of Punjab dated 31-01-2015.
10. Assuming for the sake of arguments that the petitioners have a genuine grievance, they, nevertheless, have chosen a wrong forum as Motor Vehicle Rules, 1969, provide appellate forum under Section 96-A of the Rules, which is reproduced as follows; "96-A. Appeal against the orders of Provincial Transport Authority, ---The Authority to hear and decide an appeal against the orders of the Provincial Transport Authority shall be the Board of Revenue. "
11. In accordance with the spirit of trichotomy of powers envisaged in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, rates are to be decided as policy matter in fiscal planning, therefore, High Court cannot exercise jurisdiction to go into reasonableness of rates, falling outside the domain of judicial determination (AIR 1976 SC 1986). As such, a High Court would not be justified in deciding the matters primarily within the jurisdiction of the tax authorities involving the question of fact (AIR 1976 SC 2512).
12. In views of the above, the instant writ petition is devoid of substance, hence dismissed.